Sony upped the memory from 4GB to 8GB of DDR5.An 8-core AMD CPU based on Jaguar has been confirmed.An AMD GPU that has listed performance specs that match the leaked listing perfectly.6x Blu-ray drive.

Basically, the leaks were 100% accurate barring an upgrade to the amount of memory included.

Games in development shown for the PS4 at the meeting:Killzone: Shadow Fall (confirmed as a launch title)InFamous: Second SonKnackWatch DogsDriveclubDiablo 3DestinyThe Witness"Deep Down" (possibly a Dragon's Dogma sequel, also possibly a target render)

They also had tech demos for Havok physics, Unreal Engine 4, Luminous Engine (Square Enix, with the promise of a Final Fantasy announcement for PS4 at E3), a creation tool from Media Molecule (Little Big Planet) and a facial tech demo from Quantic Dream (Heavy Rain).

CD Projekt Red has confirmed that The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt will be on the PS4.

Also, there's a new controller. It looks pretty snazzy IMO, and you can find the pictures below. Improvements include better ergonomics, concave triggers, improved response on the analog sticks (they got rid of the stupid huge dead zone, increased accuaracy and essentially have concave triggers now instead of convex). There's also Move integration and a touchpad in the middle (not a screen!) There's a headset jack this time around, and a monoaural headset will be included with every console.

Spoiler: show

Hooray for concave triggers!

Sony also spoke about the Gaikai streaming service, what it means to the new network they're building with the sharing functionality and their hopes to be able to stream games for backwards compatibility (though this has *not* been confirmed yet).

You can find Sony's recap of the event here.And you can watch an archive of the event yourself if you want to, here.

The original post:

There isn't going to be a lot to say for a while, though perhaps we'll get our first real information at the Sony event on the 20th. But the new consoles are being talked about loosely in other threads and it’s leading to some off-topic conversation that just doesn’t fit anywhere else right now. The purpose of this thread is just to provide a separate forum for discussion of the upcoming consoles.

We have leaks and rumors that talk about the hardware specs of the new consoles, but nothing is nailed down. For now at least, it’s all rumor and subject to change, but it appears that both console makers are going with eight-core AMD CPUs running at 1.6GHz and that both of them are going with GPUs based on similar (or even the same) AMD Radeon architecture.

The differences we’ve heard about so far involve the number of “compute units” on the GPU, the memory configurations, the amount of system resources required by the OS, and a bit of additional hardware that could provide some differentiation.

The PS4 is said to feature 18 “CUs” on the GPU, whereas the Xbox 720 (for lack of an actual name) is said to feature only 12 of them.

On the other hand, the 720 is said to have 8 GB of RAM compared to the 4 GB of the PS4. But the memory on the PS4 is said to be GDDR4 compared to GDDR3, with 3.5 GB actually available to games on the PS4 and 5 GB available to games on the 720. That’s a huge memory investment on the part of Microsoft to get the 720 to do things other than gaming in the background if true.

When we start learning actual, concrete information about the systems, I'll update the OP. And once the consoles near release, I'm sure people will either create dedicated threads for each, or continue the existing PlayStation and Xbox threads on the fora.

If/when I grab one, I'll probably sell my PS3 stuff and go with the XBox, reason being that I have more faith in Microsoft's experience/ability re: creating and curating a TV-connected internet appliance & content marketplace (that also plays games).

Sony may or may not release better gaming hardware. Doesn't matter; they will be close enough that the differences will be unimportant compared to everything else. For me, expertise in "everything else" comes down to Multiplayer/Marketplace/Media. I don't care about cores or memory bandwidth, and I sure as hell don't care about your gimmicky controllers (which hasn't seen a major useful evolution since the PS2). Exclusives will largely be a non-issue (and if they are I predict advantage: Microsoft). I don't forsee a huge difference in ability to attract mainstream game developers.

I do predict advantage:MS for MMM-everything-else based on XBL vs PS+. I think MS will write superior system software for the console and back it up with superior cloud presence. The opportunity to tie in with other Windows devices is theirs to seize or squander. They don't even need to be spectacular, they just need to be better than Sony.

Making this thread was brought about by a conversation that started in the Console Sales Thread, where we were talking about the price for the PS4. A Japanese newspaper is claiming that it will cost 40,000 yen, which works out to $428 USD and a likely US price of $400. And there's only one SKU this time, if the rumors are true.

There are some people on GESC that know a thing or two about how the hardware actually works and I'd be extremely curious to hear what they have to say about the differences between the two rumored specs would play out in the real world.

Cross-posted:

Quote:

I don't really have a handle on how much more powerful the PS4 will actually be at this point, even if everything rumored is true. It seems to come down to faster RAM (but 1.5 GB less of it available) coupled with 50% more processing units on the GPU. How many of the CPU cores will be required by the OS for background operating also seems to be in question. But it does sound like they're using essentially the same CPU and essentially the same GPU.

It seems to me at that point that multiplatform games would just be targetted for performance on the 720 and basically look the same on the PS4 - and that any visual upgrade on the PS4 version would be substantially less noticeable than what you saw going up from the PS2 to the Xbox.

I'm going to expose my complete ignorance of how this stuff actually operates here, but what is the faster memory on the PS4 going to provide besides compensating for there being less of it available (3.5 GB vs 5 GB if the rumors are correct)?

And if the architecture and clock speeds of the GPUs are basically the same, what are multiplatform developers going to do with those extra processing units? Run slightly better AA and AF with some more headroom on the postprocessing? That sounds like something that would lead to differences similar to what you see between the 360 and PS3 versions of DmC, just with the positions reversed.

Isn't this time fun in a console's life cycle? 100 rumors flying about the internet of which likely only a handful are true. These rumors become definite fact to fanboys arguing on message boards across the planet. Every gamer is acting like a starving dog, ready to pounce on the slightest sign of food when all we really want is to start playing these things

I own a Wii, 360 and PS3. My Wii and PS3 are very dusty... I think the Xbox won me over early on with achievements (there weren't any trophies for quite some time post-PS3 launch).

In all honesty, the thing I'm really holding my breath for is to know if the consoles are backwards compatible...with accessories. I have so many... 360 controllers, DJ turntables, crappy plastic instruments, arcade sticks, driving wheels and other doodads... I'm really hoping these will continue to function with the new Xbox. Especially the arcade sticks... expensive suckers.

I have a gaming PC as my primary platform. This generation the exclusives on the PS3 like Valkyria Chronicles have appealed more to me than the 360 exclusives like Halo. I expect this to be true of the next generation as well.

720 = more shooter exclusives, more sales in America.PS4 = more quirky and JRPG exclusives, more sales to me.

I'll probably end up with both again once there are enough non-PC exclusives to play.

I'd expect at least some level of compatibility with accessories simply because they'll both probably be using USB again. Arcade sticks and driving wheels are the mostly likely suspects to just carry over, IMO.

From the rumors, the PS4 will have no software backwards compatiblity at all. Which could be a problem for me, considering how heavily I invested into PSN titles. For the 720, the rumors are incredibly vague, with people seemingly guessing at limited software emulation in the same way the 360 can play some Xbox titles. If this stuff really doesn't carry over for the most part, I'm probably done buying anything from PSN or XBLA if there's even a chance it ever sees a PC release.

The PS3 was my most used console this generation, but that comes down entirely to the strength of PS3 exclusive titles. Most multiplatform titles I played on the 360, plus the rare exclusive I was interested in. The multiplayer aspect doesn't really play into it for me as I do all of that on the PC through Steam.

If the PS4 actually does have stronger hardware this time around, I wonder what it'll take to convince me to buy a 720. Forza/Halo/Gears isn't going to do it and doubling down on the Kinect is even worse for what I want. It's weird to say after owning a PS3, 360 and a Wii this generation but I might only get one console this time and spend most of my gaming just on the PC.

...If I really do only get one console, I sure as hell hope that Sony has a better controller this time around. Especially the damn triggers. The stupid touchpad gimmick does nothing for me.

In all honesty, the thing I'm really holding my breath for is to know if the consoles are backwards compatible...with accessories. I have so many... 360 controllers, DJ turntables, crappy plastic instruments

Given that it appears the plastic music games genre has dried up, the only real question here is backward compatibility.----I'm interested to see what the next XBox does. Beyond that, whatever.

Posting mainly to make the thread orange. I have little interest in the wild ass-rumors that plague this part of the cycle. Once the announcements are upon us and less shitty-rumors get leaked, I'll be interested.

If/when I grab one, I'll probably sell my PS3 stuff and go with the XBox, reason being that I have more faith in Microsoft's experience/ability re: creating and curating a TV-connected internet appliance & content marketplace (that also plays games).

I have faith in their willingness to release a product that fails 75% of the time new and 66% of the time when replaced with a referb. RROD FTW!

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

Passing off rumor and speculation as something that Sony and Microsoft are actually promoting is... a bit extreme.

As for the hardware failure rates... you can see the consequences of that reflected directly in the choices that Sony and MS are making with the parts this time. CPUs running at only 1.6 GHz. GPUs seemingly based off of mobile architectures. They're specifically aiming for less heat, less power draw and thus, better reliability.

I'd be quite frankly astonished if either system ended up with a major hardware failure issue this time around.

I absolutely don't care about the hardware specs on the respective platforms. They are going to be similar enough that it doesn't really matter, and developers are going to be coding to the least common denominator anyway.

What concerns me more is what ancillary services will be available for the system (watching movies, etc.), how much they will cost, and how secure they will be. Neither Sony nor Microsoft has been the shining example of good account security this go around on their respective platforms. Sony was probably worse just because the PSN hack was so egregiously stupid, but MS is certainly no slouch in the stupid security department as they continue to have problems with social engineering YEARS after the issues first came to light. And so far as I know, you still cannot cancel an XBox Live recurring charge without spending 20+ minutes on the phone with a CSR and sacrificing a chicken.

I've been gaming on PC a lot more since mid-2011 or so. Enough that I've cancelled Xbox Live and I've hardly used either my PS3 or 360. Honestly my wife uses them more than I do.

The PS3 gets a lot of use when MLB The Show and NBA 2K* comes out. I did enjoy the Uncharted series on PS3 along with the Disgaea games and Valkyrie Chronicles.

That said, I'll most likely still keep a eye on the new systems and maybe take a plunge depending on the games. I'm hoping that you can still use used games and that the controllers stay pretty much the same.

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

Passing off rumor and speculation as something that Sony and Microsoft are actually promoting is... a bit extreme.

As for the hardware failure rates... you can see the consequences of that reflected directly in the choices that Sony and MS are making with the parts this time. CPUs running at only 1.6 GHz. GPUs seemingly based off of mobile architectures. They're specifically aiming for less heat, less power draw and thus, better reliability.

I'd be quite frankly astonished if either system ended up with a major hardware failure issue this time around.

It's not just rumor and speculation at this point. Edge Magazine had an article earlier this week that tied their reputation to the claim that they had several strong sources that said the next Xbox will require an always-on internet connection and have a software method of disabling used games, and Eurogamer/Digital Foundry's analysis of the likely tech behind both systems seems to be well-sourced also. Although things aren't nailed down completely and there's time for them to change, the overall picture is definitely taking shape.

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

Passing off rumor and speculation as something that Sony and Microsoft are actually promoting is... a bit extreme.

Also saying that you don't like Sony/MS preventing used sales so you're going to Steam is more than a little ironic.

Deviation wrote:

Requiring always-on internet for the next Xbox would be complete madness. There's still a very significant portion of Xbox 360 users that never connect the thing to the internet at all.

I sort of thought that as well, but then I saw an article indicating that a surprisingly low percentage of Xboxes are not online now. It's still fairly significant, something like 25%, but that number will come down even further over the course of the next console's life. Also you have to consider that MS and Sony are going to be looking to make a lot of money on their online services, so forcing people to be online probably ends up being a significant win even if they lose a portion of potential market.

I sort of thought that as well, but then I saw an article indicating that a surprisingly low percentage of Xboxes are not online now. It's still fairly significant, something like 25%, but that number will come down even further over the course of the next console's life. Also you have to consider that MS and Sony are going to be looking to make a lot of money on their online services, so forcing people to be online probably ends up being a significant win even if they lose a portion of potential market.

It'll be a shame if it does go that way. I don't have console access to highspeed right now so I will be out on the new systems for a long while if they are always online required.

I've always been a PlayStation guy, but am thinking of jumping over to the dark side when the next gen machines come out. This is for a couple of reasons:

I now live on the other side of then planet to most of my friends. Setting up gaming time is difficult enough, and most of my friends now have xboxes. I need to get the console that gives me the most chance of gaming with my friends.

Sony really treated their customers like shit during the PS3 period. The online gaming experience isn't as feature rich or as smooth as Xbox live, the firmware updating system is a pain in the arse and the, while initially being quick and easy to use, was 'improved' to be slow and significanly less user friendly.

Exclusives will largely be a non-issue (and if they are I predict advantage: Microsoft). I don't forsee a huge difference in ability to attract mainstream game developers.

I do predict advantage:MS for MMM-everything-else based on XBL vs PS+.

I would agree with the first statement, i think exclusives arent really going to be an issue anymore.The big thing for me is what does a subscription offer? The XBL sub is not worth the money, it simply gives you access to online games, nothing more.PS+ gives you a tonne of free games. Good AAA games.So i think MS will have to step up in that department

Personally, I'm not seeing much of a reason for getting either console next generation. I may end up with a PS4 or whatever its called if it continues getting more JRPG's. I'll probably stick to my PC + Wii U (for Nintendo stuff).

I imagine I'll probably go the same route I did this last generation. Got a Wii when that came out and didn't get a 360 until 2009 or so when a small trifecta of things happened: $200 model with a whopping 256MB built in, die shrink or some revision for hopefully better reliability, and Trials HD came out. I basically got it for Trials and Pac-Man CE which I had been wanting for a while before then. Yeah I'm weird.

So far I have the Wii U (sort of for free), and barring some random game I really really want and a low price at launch, I'll probably be holding off for a while again. Plus I have a sizable backlog of 360 stuff (XBLA and disc) so that'll be another knock against the new Xbox assuming backwards compatibility is lacking, if existent at all. I'd be interested in the media features if the I if didn't already set up MCE boxes and 360s as extenders already last year. Otherwise XBL Gold essentially being a pay wall for free services everywhere else sucks pretty bad, if they keep that up I guess that'll make it even easier to hold off. I just hope they don't get the Cave shooters again, although I wouldn't be surprised if MS courts them again (...unless they just give up on Japan entirely).

PS4 I never really thought about, but I guess I don't really have anything against them lately other than the security issues. Course I haven't had a PS device in years so I've only experienced their good/bad crap vicariously through stuff I've read online.

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

Passing off rumor and speculation as something that Sony and Microsoft are actually promoting is... a bit extreme.

Also saying that you don't like Sony/MS preventing used sales so you're going to Steam is more than a little ironic.

Not my post, but I'll respond from my perspective. You know how many games I buy new on Steam each year? Maybe two. They're always games that I want to support the creation of from the beginning and usually are ones that I would never consider reselling even if I could. You know how many digital downloads I buy on a console? 0.

You know how many games I buy the rest of the year with a single $60 purchase? Tons. The average that I pay for a game is about $7.50. At that price I get 6-7 games at the cost of a single console title. Two console titles if they've been out a year or more and have been reduced to their "low cost" price point.

The inability to resell Steam purchases doesn't concern me at all because the vast majority of my purchases are so trivially priced that even if the game ends up sucking I'm not out enough money to care. Expensive cup of coffee and all that. If the consoles explicitly block reselling of physical games then they will have to make the prices low enough on the digital side for me to even begin to care to look at them. I'm not throwing $60 out on a game that I might not enjoy when I have zero recourse to get some of that back.

The lower income segment of the population is even more concerned about reselling/buying used. Now the console manufacturers may decide that people who buy used all the time, except for whichever they're more interested in: Madden or Call of Duty, do not spend enough for them to care about. That's their prerogative, but I think they'll find that secondary market is very important to keeping marginal income individuals buying new games. Getting $20 back on a game trade-in within a month of release effectively makes every purchase $40, which means they can purchase 3 new games for about the same out-of-pocket that someone who never trades in buys 2.

Without getting too deep into the bigger issue, I don't buy the argument that an always online console would force prices down like Steam. Yes, maybe the lack of retailer pressure would make them consider small price drops, but if this total control leads to great prices, why does no other service on the PC seem to compete with Steam's prices? Note that I am not counting Amazon and other resellers here, since I can't see Amazon being able to list Xbox Live or PSN items at any discount, just like their XBLA/PSN offerings right now.

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

...saying that you don't like Sony/MS preventing used sales so you're going to Steam is more than a little ironic.

...You know how many games I buy new on Steam each year? Maybe two. They're always games that I want to support the creation of from the beginning and usually are ones that I would never consider reselling even if I could.

Emphasis mine. Seems like you're missing the point. You buy games that are used or on sale, so you don't care about resale. You're pretty happy about how the economics of your choices work out. Which is fantastic, but you pretty much just said you don't have any intention of participating in the next-gen secondary market as a seller*.

Crackhead Johny apparently does, but his "solution" of moving to a platform where used sales are forbidden is non-sequitur. That's what I assume HappyBunny was responding to.

*Note: If you can't sell used games, guess what else you can't do? Buy used games. You're now completely at the mercy of Steam sales. Maybe you're fine with that. Personally, I might be myself. Steam's great. Is it that great though?

I'm thinking PC only this go around, at least at first. I'll reserve judgement on the DRM front until we have more concrete information, but I've been severely impacted by serious security snafus from both PSN and XBL leading to locked out accounts for one month and three months, respectively. Steam, on the other hand, has worked more or less flawlessly.

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

...saying that you don't like Sony/MS preventing used sales so you're going to Steam is more than a little ironic.

...You know how many games I buy new on Steam each year? Maybe two. They're always games that I want to support the creation of from the beginning and usually are ones that I would never consider reselling even if I could.

Emphasis mine. Seems like you're missing the point. You buy games that are used or on sale, so you don't care about resale. You're pretty happy about how the economics of your choices work out. Which is fantastic, but you pretty much just said you don't have any intention of participating in the next-gen secondary market as a seller*.

No, I said that on a platform where used sales are verboten no one is going to get my full retail price, first sale purchase unless the game is either exceptional (in one way or another as decided upon by me) or comes from a creator that I specifically want to support with a new sale. I do occasionally, though less in the past few years than I used to, sell my physical games to the used market. I also, fairly frequently, purchase used games for the consoles. Mostly it's to pick up long out of print and otherwise unavailable games, but I do make use of it.

Quote:

Crackhead Johny apparently does, but his "solution" of moving to a platform where used sales are forbidden is non-sequitur. That's what I assume HappyBunny was responding to.

It's not though, as Steam has shown a pricing flexibility that users are willing to embrace in spite of the fact that they can never resell their purchases.

Not my post, but I'll respond from my perspective. You know how many games I buy new on Steam each year? Maybe two. They're always games that I want to support the creation of from the beginning and usually are ones that I would never consider reselling even if I could. You know how many digital downloads I buy on a console? 0.

You know how many games I buy the rest of the year with a single $60 purchase? Tons. The average that I pay for a game is about $7.50. At that price I get 6-7 games at the cost of a single console title. Two console titles if they've been out a year or more and have been reduced to their "low cost" price point.

The inability to resell Steam purchases doesn't concern me at all because the vast majority of my purchases are so trivially priced that even if the game ends up sucking I'm not out enough money to care. Expensive cup of coffee and all that. If the consoles explicitly block reselling of physical games then they will have to make the prices low enough on the digital side for me to even begin to care to look at them. I'm not throwing $60 out on a game that I might not enjoy when I have zero recourse to get some of that back.

The lower income segment of the population is even more concerned about reselling/buying used. Now the console manufacturers may decide that people who buy used all the time, except for whichever they're more interested in: Madden or Call of Duty, do not spend enough for them to care about. That's their prerogative, but I think they'll find that secondary market is very important to keeping marginal income individuals buying new games. Getting $20 back on a game trade-in within a month of release effectively makes every purchase $40, which means they can purchase 3 new games for about the same out-of-pocket that someone who never trades in buys 2.

You stole the words right from my keyboard. I generally buy new console games and rarely resell, so a block on used games wouldn't impact me much. However, it still really rubs me the wrong way. Like you, the inability to resell my Steam library isn't a concern due to the amazing sales I use to load up on games. If Sony/MS plan to kill the used game market, I sure hope they have the sense to include a little carrot with that mighty big stick. Valve has shown how absurdly massive the sales increases are during (and after) Steam sales -- something similar for consoles would get me gaming on consoles more often than I do now.

Why does no other service on the PC seem to compete with Steam's prices? Note that I am not counting Amazon and other resellers here,

Why not? Just because another site sells you a Steam code as a convenience doesn't mean they're not competing. Amazon and Green Man Gaming regularly undercut the Steam storefront prices this last Winter sale. Even Origin has had 75% off sales, and even GOG's newer titles will have deep sales.

I reject your assumption that "no other service on the PC seem to compete with Steam's prices"

Quote:

since I can't see Amazon being able to list Xbox Live or PSN items at any discount, just like their XBLA/PSN offerings right now.

They have in the past. They had the L.A. Noire online pass for less than on PSN, and once had a year of PlayStation Plus for $40 instead of $50. That may be it or there may be more, I don't know; those are just two I can distinctly remember.

Why does no other service on the PC seem to compete with Steam's prices? Note that I am not counting Amazon and other resellers here,

Why not? Just because another site sells you a Steam code as a convenience doesn't mean they're not competing. Amazon and Green Man Gaming regularly undercut the Steam storefront prices this last Winter sale. Even Origin has had 75% off sales, and even GOG's newer titles will have deep sales.

I reject your assumption that "no other service on the PC seem to compete with Steam's prices"

Took the words out of my mouth. Other digital retailers absolutely do compete with Steam's prices. Steam is by no means the only outfit offering games for rock-bottom prices.

Interesting to see all these different gaming approaches based mostly on game genre preferences.

I'm in a very easy boat: I do 90% of my gaming on race sims, and greatly prefer the Gran Turismos and Forzas at the moment to the technically better but underwhelming content (especially in terms of licensing of car manufacturers) of equivalents on the PC. So basically I own 360/PS3 and will upgrade to 720/PS4 triggered solely by GT6/Forza5 releases. I'm expecting my multiplatform (XID/HID) wheel to retain full compatibility, but we'll see.

My personal goal is to get rid of a desktop PC in the medium term, move over to NAS+convertible tablets and just leave the consoles for gaming. But I admit that I'm not quite ready to completely give up my Core i7 desktop with a big GPU just yet... still waiting and seeing

Why does no other service on the PC seem to compete with Steam's prices? Note that I am not counting Amazon and other resellers here,

Why not? Just because another site sells you a Steam code as a convenience doesn't mean they're not competing. Amazon and Green Man Gaming regularly undercut the Steam storefront prices this last Winter sale. Even Origin has had 75% off sales, and even GOG's newer titles will have deep sales.

I reject your assumption that "no other service on the PC seem to compete with Steam's prices"

Quote:

since I can't see Amazon being able to list Xbox Live or PSN items at any discount, just like their XBLA/PSN offerings right now.

They have in the past. They had the L.A. Noire online pass for less than on PSN, and once had a year of PlayStation Plus for $40 instead of $50. That may be it or there may be more, I don't know; those are just two I can distinctly remember.

These are fair points, I did not know that Amazon was able to discount LA Noire's pass below PSN's price, I concede that it is possible, at least with Sony, but I still don't see Microsoft 'opening up' their market place any further than they have- Amazon's selection of codes for content for Xbox is extremely limited and as far as I am aware (please correct me) never cheaper. Gamestop sells you points code rather than explicit content codes when you buy XBLA content from them. Since Microsoft seemingly doesn't allow resellers to affect prices, this is why I don't count them as a force to drive prices down on a theoretical all-digital console.

One caveat to this is that there have been sales on MS points, as well as Gold and PS+ Subs, like you mentioned. Maybe this is how resellers can help compete.

I guess I also should have clarified that the price competition I was saying didn't make sense was on newer titles (should have quoted). What services besides Steam are offering games for 50%+ off within 6 (sometimes even 3) months of release? This is an honest question, maybe I am looking past Origin and others' deals due to bias against the service(s).

Regardless, I still think that a lot of the prices we see on Steam are helped by Valve's happiness to let others sell keys and the competition that fosters- if Sony/MS control their service top down like they do now, why would they suddenly open the door to deeper discounts? I am not saying that they couldn't, I am saying I don't see it as a given or even likely. Microsoft certainly seem content to wait most of a year for quick 33 to 50% markdowns on XBLA before leaving them at their original prices. Don't you think they would be experimenting with pricing more by now if they intended to try Steam's method of handling digital content?

Edit: TL;DR- If losing retail truly would see games go to Steam-level pricing on consoles, why are PSN/XBLA holding prices like they do, since Sony/MS has full control over those marketplaces?

Whenever I make the mistake of reading the comments on general news sites, I find that more than a few folks don't even want a new console just yet. I'm a bit unsure myself. Depending on your time frame, this 8 year cycle was like sticking with the NES up to the introduction of the Playstation. Historically, we're way overdue.

Still seems a bit weird that neither system is expected to give much an improvement in graphics given how long it has been. I know game development costs didn't exactly scale well this time around. Diminishing returns, yadda, yadda yadda. But it would be nice to be wowed every now and again. Everything that's come out so far seems to suggest that that's a no-go this time around...

I don't buy the AMD APU rumor. Unless there's proof that TSMC can fab it, I don't see its price going down enough, or its specs staying stable enough, to make profitable $200 consoles like the 4GB 360 S possible. AMD GPU? Sure.

I don't buy always-on for the same reasons people have already mentioned (not enough Internet). I also don't buy no used sales. I could see them using new sales with codes/rfid to tie a game to an account, but the disc I would think would still work used. The used owner would just lose the ability to add it to their account a la how we do Steam titles now.

This generation will be the first in the last three (including the upcoming one) console generations where the available PC GPUs far outstrip their console counterparts. I don't think this will be too much of an issue until 4k sees significant uptake. I've hooked my GTX 680 SLI gaming box to my 1080p TV, but it's 1080p. The extra GPU horsepower isn't utilized in most instances.

I am of the opinion that the platform is somewhat more important than the console this time out. Yes, the PS3 works, but good lord it's inconsistent. It's far more enjoyable to use the 360 as it just "gets out of the way". Even my gaming PC is less frustrating than the PS3. Sony really needs to bring their A game to the experience. It's not enough to have exclusives if the act of trying to use those exclusives is so off-putting. I own plenty of PS3 exclusives that I haven't played because of this.

I guess I also should have clarified that the price competition I was saying didn't make sense was on newer titles (should have quoted). What services besides Steam are offering games for 50%+ off within 6 (sometimes even 3) months of release? This is an honest question, maybe I am looking past Origin and others' deals due to bias against the service(s).

Don't you think they would be experimenting with pricing more by now if they intended to try Steam's method of handling digital content?

Well, they are experimenting. PlayStation Plus is definitely an experiment, and wasn't a real success until they just offered a pile of free games. PSN has (had?) a 13 for '13 sale, with 13 titles at 50% off, 75% off for Plus members (I picked up a GFWL-less Arkham City and Tokyo Jungle for 'bout $20 total, myself).

Are they matching Steam sales? No, but I don't know that they should be held to the same bar. They have a huge R&D sunk cost to recover (and new sunk costs underway with new consoles), whereas Valve doesn't have to do the work of Intel, AMD, and Dell. (The promise of a Steam Box, PC-quality gaming and Steam-sale prices in the zero-configuration environment of a console is alluring, but I think the lack of a fixed hardware spec is going to keep it from ever coming true.)

I am of the opinion that the platform is somewhat more important than the console this time out. Yes, the PS3 works, but good lord it's inconsistent. It's far more enjoyable to use the 360 as it just "gets out of the way". Even my gaming PC is less frustrating than the PS3. Sony really needs to bring their A game to the experience.

I'm personally of the opinion that Sony can create a good console, but not a good console experience. The not-that-long-ago released Vita is proof they haven't changed there.

For instance, I will be totally not-shocked if their "Share" button goes to some slow-to-upload proprietary-format Sony site instead of just YouTube. Maybe it won't be that bad, but they will make at least three (3) usability mistakes of that kind at launch.

I guess I also should have clarified that the price competition I was saying didn't make sense was on newer titles (should have quoted). What services besides Steam are offering games for 50%+ off within 6 (sometimes even 3) months of release? This is an honest question, maybe I am looking past Origin and others' deals due to bias against the service(s).

But aren't Amazon and GMG reselling Steam keys? Are they doing this with anywhere besides Steam? If they could get their hands on PSN/XBLA keys at good enough prices, I would think they would be reselling those right now at great deals.

Quote:

Quote:

Don't you think they would be experimenting with pricing more by now if they intended to try Steam's method of handling digital content?

Well, they are experimenting. PlayStation Plus is definitely an experiment, and wasn't a real success until they just offered a pile of free games. PSN has (had?) a 13 for '13 sale, with 13 titles at 50% off, 75% off for Plus members (I picked up a GFWL-less Arkham City and Tokyo Jungle for 'bout $20 total, myself).

This is a really good point, I somehow missed the 13 for 13 sale, and I guess I stopped watching PS+ deals when I kept being unimpressed initially. This, combined with how Sony is being portrayed as financially desperate could lead to better digital prices. As it stands, though, you do have to pay to get the PS+ discounts, and while the benefits of PS+ can be great, they also only make sense if you don't already have the 'free' games and have interest in the chosen discounts, otherwise you get burned.

Quote:

Are they matching Steam sales? No, but I don't know that they should be held to the same bar. They have a huge R&D sunk cost to recover (and new sunk costs underway with new consoles), whereas Valve doesn't have to do the work of Intel, AMD, and Dell. (The promise of a Steam Box, PC-quality gaming and Steam-sale prices in the zero-configuration environment of a console is alluring, but I think the lack of a fixed hardware spec is going to keep it from ever coming true.)

I completely agree here. My point is that it was suggested that making a console digital only would somehow directly lead to much better pricing, and I was merely opining that I don't think prices would move very far until other factors forced them to.

As Sony and MS are crowing about no ability to sell used games on their new systems I'm thinking Steam Box.

Passing off rumor and speculation as something that Sony and Microsoft are actually promoting is... a bit extreme.

Also saying that you don't like Sony/MS preventing used sales so you're going to Steam is more than a little ironic.

I assume you mean Alanis Morissette "ironic".

Steam games cannot be resold and so you do not really own them. They are disposable like Bic lighters. And you pay Bic light prices for them. A THQ humble bundle for 6$? count me in! Games on disk that you can sell, are things that you own. These are not disposable and so you pay more for them, these are Prometheus lighters. The same games on disk as in the THQ bundle are ~300$.

Now Sony and MS want to sell Bic lighter games at Prometheus prices next gen... This cannot really be compared to Steam where you get Bic lighter games at Bic lighter prices.